Why the theory of evolution is so important

[james dixon]

Polls show that 40% to 50%+ Christians reject the science of evolution in one way or another.

My be is that poll was taken at one church just after the pastor told his flock that they would go to hell if the believed in evolution.
I checked, I was wrong, I lost my own bet.
It's not the first time nor will it be the last.
-

 

[shunyadragon]

You just need to step back and take a much broader view on this. There is nothing in your teaching or belief that precludes the idea that God intended his creation to develop over time, as in millions of years to mature into the physical state we are in today.


-

This is true, the Baha'i Faith believes in the harmony of science and religion and science, and science is accepted as the descriptor of the nature of our physical existence. he Baha'i Faith describes the spiritual evolution of our physical existence, life and humanity.

Nonetheless , , , he evidence for evolution and billions of years of history is demonstrated by science beyond any reasonable doubt, and the fundamentalist view of Creation has absolutely no basis in science nor the simple reality of the physical nature of our earth, solar system and universe as it is.

The Baha'i Faith acknowledges 'the simple reality of the physical nature of our earth, solar system and universe as it is.'

 

[We Never Know]

Scripture is not evidence. It is what is being debated. Science does not support you. Nor does history. When are you going to post some reliable evidence?

You refute your own posts by your inability to support them. And you have been endlessly refuted.

But go ahead. Let's see some reliable evidence.

Sometimes books and passed down stories are all we have as evidence.

Let me ask you, the book George Washington: The Crossing by Jack E. Levin. Is this book evidence of Washington crossing the Delaware?

What evidence do we have of that happening?

 

[shunyadragon]

My be is that poll was taken at one church just after the pastor told his flock that they would go to hell if the believed in evolution.
-

Actually the fundamentalist churches have put the fear in the congregations with this threat for many many years.

 

[shunyadragon]

Sometimes books and passed down stories are all we have as evidence.

Let me ask you, the book George Washington: The Crossing by Jack E. Levin. Is this book evidence of Washington crossing the Delaware?

What evidence do we have of that happening?

No the book is not the best evidence, It is the corroborating evidence The testimony of those that fought with him and the Hesions that were captured. Maps and archaeological evidence of the cmap sites also provide corroborating evidence of the campaign.

 

[We Never Know]

The testimony of those that fought with him and the Hesions that were captured.

Passed on stories and nothing more.

 

[james dixon]

Actually the fundamentalist churches have put the fear in the congregations with this threat for many many years.

I went back and corrected my ignoramus post
and I added my correction here in your post before reading "your" post; by saying, thanks for this post of yours that states it the way it is
-

 

[We Never Know]

Actually the fundamentalist churches have put the fear in the congregations with this threat for many many years.

Draw them in with promises and keep them there with threats.

 

[shunyadragon]

Passed on stories and nothing more.

No, the first hand testimony from different sources is the key as with all history that is well documented. You missed the part I added. The maps of the camp sites and archaeological evidence also support the campaign.

 

[We Never Know]

No the book is not the best evidence, It is the corroborating evidence The testimony of those that fought with him and the Hesions that were captured. Maps and archaeological evidence of the cmap sites also provide corroborating evidence of the campaign.

Nothing but on paper or in stories. Correct and I agree. I'm not saying the bible is accurate in any way but it's wrong to dismiss it simply because it's a book with passed down stories. What is it, 2000 years older than George crossing the river?

 

[shunyadragon]

Nothing but on paper or in stories. Correct and I agree. I'm not saying the bible is accurate in any way but it's wrong to dismiss it simply because it's a book with passed down stories.

Your original question this exchange has nothing to with the Bible, and it is not what you asked about.

 

[We Never Know]

Your original question this exchange has nothing to with the Bible, and it is not what you asked about.

My original post..

Sometimes books and passed down stories are all we have as evidence.

Let me ask you, the book George Washington: The Crossing by Jack E. Levin. Is this book evidence of Washington crossing the Delaware?

What evidence do we have of that happening?

If we can dismiss the bible because it's a book/passed down stories, we can dismiss any book of passed down stories. That was the point. It's that simple.

 

[shunyadragon]

Draw them in with promises and keep them there with threats.

Sounds like Scientology.

 

[shunyadragon]

My original post.

I dealt with this original post appropriately

If we can dismiss the bible because it's a book/passed down stories, we can dismiss any book of passed down stories. That was the point. It's that simple.

It's not that simply . . .

Each book in history must stand on its own documentation, corroborating evidence and sources. and archaeological evidence in history.

I will recommend two excellent academic sources on history in the next post IF you really want to look at the the history of the world more objectively instead of through a religious agenda.

 

[We Never Know]

Your original question this exchange has nothing to with the Bible, and it is not what you asked about.

Here's what I'm saying. Much of history that we do know comes from books/writings/stories.
The bible is writings/storues but that doesn't make it true.

Back in 1973 one of my favorite books/movies was "Walking Tall". It was based on a true story but not all of it was true. Like any story there are parts exaggerated. I don't think I've ever read a true story that wasn't exaggerated. However we got the overall story.

 

[We Never Know]

I dealt with this original post appropriately



It's not that simply . . .

Each book in history must stand on its own documentation, corroborating evidence and sources. and archaeological evidence in history.

I will recommend two excellent academic sources on history in the next post IF you really want to look at the the history of the world more objectively instead of through a religious agenda.

With George you have nothing but writings and stories. No one alive is a witness, we don't have his boat, etc. We have to choose either to accept it or deny it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Sometimes books and passed down stories are all we have as evidence.

Let me ask you, the book George Washington: The Crossing by Jack E. Levin. Is this book evidence of Washington crossing the Delaware?

What evidence do we have of that happening?

With George we do have several independent sources that tell us of him. Not so with the Bible. There are probably other sources for the claim that he crossed the Delaware. If that book was the only source that made that claim then its reliability would be in question. Do you think that is the only source for that? I don't. Also the amount of evidence required depends upon the claims that are made. If you said that you bought a dog I would accept your claim. If you said that you bought a dog that flies and knows the alphabet I would demand something just a little bit more substantial.

 

[shunyadragon]

With George you have nothing but writings and stories. No one alive is a witness, we don't have his boat, etc. We have to choose either to accept it or deny it.

We have archaeological evidence of George's life, military campaigns, and numerous corraborating first hand records.

Again if you are serious about academic history, in particular the Bible, we can we can discuss it without abundo distortions of fallacies of 'arguing from ignorance.'

 

[shunyadragon]

With George you have nothing but writings and stories. No one alive is a witness, we don't have his boat, etc. We have to choose either to accept it or deny it.

For example: Historical Hat-Trick: Using Documents, Architecture, and Archaeology at George Washington’s Mount Vernon | Perspectives on History | AHA

HISTORICAL HAT-TRICK: USING DOCUMENTS, ARCHITECTURE, AND ARCHAEOLOGY AT GEORGE WASHINGTON’S MOUNT VERNON


Erin Holmes | Aug 10, 2016

George Washington wrote everything down. He wrote so much, in fact, that the George Washington Papers Project, begun in 1968 to transcribe, annotate, and publish the complete papers of the first president of the United States, is on track to finish the projected 90-volume series in 2023. For a historian of the 18th century, this is a little overwhelming. The records encompass not only his military and political papers, but his household accounts and records of farm management. For a historian who studies the architecture of Mount Vernon, the papers include important details about Washington’s transformation of Mount Vernon from the house built by his father in 1735, to his own two-story plantation house in the late 1750s, and finally into the mansion he lived in briefly after the Revolutionary War and again after his presidency. For a historian of slavery, the documentary record provides critical insights about the daily lives of the many enslaved African Americans owned by George and Martha Washington.

. . . and George washington' life and campaign during the Revolutionary war are corroborated with literally hundreds of other first hand records and archaeology.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Dear Evols,

My experience is that it's mostly Evols who complain about everything in order to change the subject away from their ignorance of our true origins. Are you another of those people who has no idea of how or when we magically evolved from Ape to Human intelligence? If so, I'll get ready to read more of your complaints.

BTW, The Evols here have been unable to come up with a human city older than those built by Noah's great grandsons. Do you have ANY data which might explain WHY there were NO human cities until Noah arrived? And NO farming, and NO math nor ANY of the traits of modern humans? Could it be because there were NO humans on this Planet until Noah arrived?

Help the poor Evols here for they are losing so badly. God has refuted their beloved Theory of Evolution, and all they can seem to do about it is whine. Can YOU provide any assistance for them? Show us the data, and give some needed help to put Darwin back where he belongs. Will you help or will you hide from God's Truth?

Nobody has changed the subject. Evidence for your claims has been requested. That's all. For instance, you claim that Noah's Flood, as described in the Bible was an actual occurrence, when there is no evidence indicating that it ever occurred at all. You say the Bible agrees with known science, but there is no scientific evidence that a global flood actually occurred.